Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
Comments.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
I don't mind the new art direction but it sounds like they've done away with most of the actual exploration elements and roleplaying in favor of handholding. Maybe they were just aiming for a younger audience or something?
I think Baulder's Gate 3 has really ruined a lot of new RPGs for me. π€· Thanks a lot Larian for making a game so good it fucked up an entire genre.
The funny thing for me with CRPGs: DOS2 was the first one I played and I really liked it. Followed up again with BG 3 when that came out. Since then Iβve tried a bunch of other CRPGs andβ¦ I donβt think I actually like CRPGs. I just like Larian. The one exception is Disco Elysium, but thatβs so far removed from most others of the genre because it has no combat.
(breaking character for a moment) calling baldurs gate 3 a crpg doesnt exactly make sense personally to me. At least for now. Considering its fhe only triple a crpg in existence. Its effectively a different genre. Disco elysium is similar in this way. Most crpgs do not have that amount of voice acting or motion capture in the case of bg3. If there were other crpgs like these (planescape torment and tides of numenera maybe????) I could see a case for triple a crpgs being considered their own genre. Because most crpgs are either indie or double a or just a. They have a very different feel. And one thing i notice is very common with people who play baldurs gate 3 is they almost all have this same issue of not being able to enjoy any other crpg. The fact people are having in depth discussions about crpgs is a lot closer to what i hoped for, which was discussion about the content of crpgs on larger scales
The way you describe it it might be unique in a different way, being the only good triple A game in recent years.
Yeah I think you're right to some extent. It's definitely harder to get invested in the ones with no or less VA. However, I think there's also something to be said for the tutorials/starts of these games. The Larian games I've played had relatively punchy tutorials that lead into a nice amount of structured freedom very early into the experience. Disco Elsyium also gets you into the the thick of things without much explicit tutorializing because it's so mechanic light your "tutorial" ends up just being gradual introduction to your main characters, the setting, and the case, which is what you're here for anyway.
The other CRPGs have hit me with the double whammy of tutorials that lead me by the nose for way too long while also just dumping paragraphs of exposition on me that have almost nothing to do with the immediate characters or plot.
EDIT: Thinking about it a bit more: While you don't need all the voice acting and cinematic to make good, dramatic, character focused story bits, I think the converse is true: It would have been a waste to get all these great VAs only to have them stand around and dryly deliver exposition. So it kind of had to be very character focused if it was going to work and be worth the effort.
Imagine how much worse the start of BG3 would be if you run into Laezel and you just stop for like 5 minutes while you exhaust all her dialgogue options so she can explain the entire history of the Gith and the Ilithid. Even fully voice acted that would have killed the pacing.
(again breaking character from my experimental persona thing on most posts) Voice acting and no voice acting are good for different things. Planescape torment is far deeper than bg3. But i think its just a practicality thing for the most part. Writing is just easier to churn out i think compared to voice acting. And voice acted games require writing and voice acting. If you dont have much or any voice acting there is more time to dedicate to the aspects of the game that arent making a cinematic experience. Also i think some people just require a cinematic experience for some reason. I wonder if its because of a lack of creativity for lack of a better less rude sounding term that comes to mind. But i can mentally project myself into the first person on top down crpgs. I dont have trouble being immersed that way. Although i used to and had to only play games with cinematics or first person views
Same haha. I played a ton of DOS and DOS2, then I tried Pillars of Eternity because pirates and couldn't get into it. Larian is really in tune with their audience.
PoE one was better IMO.
It was the lack of voice acting for me.
For me the lack of voice acting isn't a detriment. Far from it. I much prefer the walls of text to cinematic stuffs.
I can feel that. I just like being able to sit back and watch events happen.
Breath of the wild did the same for me with open worlds.
For me it was Valheim, but BotW is a banger. They make it hard to enjoy games even when they're actually decent, like Enshrouded and Smalland. You can't help but feel it's been done better.
What probably happened is Corporate ~~overlords~~ leadership opted for an easier-to-create game direction while also attempting to diversify the game's base. Basically, and I may be eating my words as we learn more about the game, I'd expect them to have reduced the cost to create while also attempting to increase profit.
I base this off of other games which have attempted similar feats, and I'm not sure of a single one that was part of a larger series that has turned out well.
La-la-la-larian!
As just someone from the outside looking in, this game is so confusing. On one hand you have journalist sites praising this game and throwing 10/10 around like crazy and on the other you have a review like this that is critical of the game and points out (for me) very blatant faults. Do the points presented by SkillUp not matter to the average game journalist? Or is that something they actually seek in an immersive RPG experience? I'm just so lost on how it can actually be given a 10/10 after seeing this review.
Apparently, EA/Bioware will withhold early access review codes if you are critical of the game. So they are incentivized to write glowing reviews even if the game doesn't deserve it.
Got a source on that?
Um... Literally everyone in the industry? It's not a secret that access journalism runs rampant. if you need an individual just to look through Jim Sterling's videos on the subject, she often talked about her time before going independent.
Based on some other coverage I've seen, specifically from reviewers who were denied early review copies, it looks like BioWare/EA is doing what most companies do and shopping around for reviewers who will be especially positive. They're just being especially aggressive with it this time around. It's not a good look, but it's expected for basically any major publisher.
It sounds like after the early press only event they did a while back, a bunch of reviewers who were critical of the game then got ghosted by EA's PR people and never received early review copies.
So, like all pre-launch reviews take any reviews you're seeing now with a grain of salt and wait until a week or so after launch to see the reviews that weren't cherry-picked by EA's corporate PR.
It's been at least 20 years since video game "journalists" or "critics" were actually honest. Companies will blacklist anyone that doesn't write a positive review for their games, so everything published before or on release day is advertising.
If you want honest reviews you need to wait 24-48 hours after release for real reviews. If you actually want opinions from those that completed a game you need to wait even longer.
There's definitely some sketchy stuff going on, but in general, reviews are mostly an opinion. A lover of the original versus a hater of the original will probably not give the same score to this game. It really depends on the reviewers history, preferences, ability to investigate, empathize with other demographics / types of players, patience, endurance, willingness to forgive bad gameplay/graphics/story/music as long as the gameplay/graphics/story/music is good, etc.
Imo it's just that SkillUp is a good reviewer and many others are not.
When BF2042 was released many big papers said it was super good when it was utter garbage.
Either go the metacritic way and average things out or stick to a few reviewers you know share your taste.
I've watched a couple of his videos and he's just my style. A lot of his points are just not important to me and that's okay. Find a reviewer that matches your profile.
I think it's interesting how highly people speak of him but strongly disagree with some of his recommendations in Gaming subreddits. Tho that might be because his reviews to these games are just well written.
He gives a lot of detail as to why he likes or doesn't like various things, so you can determine for yourself if they're important to you or not. SKillUp is my favorite reviewer, and I definitely don't agree with him on all his takes.
He's usually on point but I don't always agree with him personally. Still, it's easy to decide because he usually makes a point of telling why he likes/dislikes something. People have differing opinions on the same things and that's okay. Great review, as usual.
I know it sounds bad to say it now, but games journalism has always been terrible. You can find examples decades ago of access journalism and journalists who didn't even play the games they reviewed. Sure, back then they were usually harsher than they should have been, but i feel like that was healthier for the industry.
Two groups will 10/10 this game: access journalists and agenda-driven journalists. Everyone else is going to be a bit more critical, especially considering Baldur's Gate 3 exists and is still fresh.
EA 's fuckery with reviews is really on display with this game.
On the plus side, we get a really easy litmus test on who's a legit game reviewer, and who will say whatever they need to keep the gravy train rolling.
Skillup started the video saying that other people can have other opinions on the game. He didn't like the combat, the art style, or the new tone. Those are all subjective things that other people could have enjoyed. Purely just in the video, he talked about how he didn't like the necromancer character, but every clip he showed I liked. It's just different tastes.
The facial animations are atrocious, I could never disagree with him there. Completely lifeless.
Itβs better on your mental health, wanting a good escapist game and story, not to have first release bugs interrupting you. Wait for the second patch.
By then, real reviews will make themselves known.
By then, real reviews will make themselves known.
This is the way. There are corpo/early access reviewers who are giving it 10/10s, and I'm also seeing morons screeching about review-boming it because of the DEI/Woke Agendaβ’οΈ and that you can make a non-binary player character. It's gonna be a shitshow on release.
Feel bad for the Dragon Age fans, they've been waiting for this for ages.
Iβm one of them.
Iβm constantly looking for that game format since Mass Effect 1 and Dragon Age Origins.
Thereβs been what? Greedfall. Thatβs it.
Which is sad. TV series have knocked movies on their asses as the better media lately because they are now the better story tellers. This format of game tells the best stories.
And yet theyβre just not being made.
As much as Iβd like this game ASAP, Iβm still waiting.
I hope Dreadwolf gives you at least a little bit of what you crave, soldier π«‘
For what it's worth, Dragon Age as a fandom has some of the nicest, least gatekeepy gamers I've ever interacted with. I feel really bad y'all are stuck under EA's thumb.
Remember, Bioware started as a love project for DND. Baldurs gate. Neverwinter nights. (NWN was a community!) Some of us are from that time, just old DND people scratching that itch.
Yuuuuuup. Not worth getting a save deleted or dealing with the bugs. Really hoping for it.
Edit: purchased after seeing good technical reviews. Enjoying so far still in prologue. Tone is a bit lighthearted so far. Combat is flashy and fun. Will see how it holds up as time goes on
Man can i just say; fuck those right wing tourists? All their pointless screeching does is drown out actual criticism and give bad developers an excuse to ignore feedback. If they cared they'd actually have something to say, like how the combat shouldn't be hack n slash and is uninspired even for a hack n slash.
I agree with you, same thing happened with Last of Us 2. Valid criticism was drowned out and to this day if you say you disliked any aspect of the game you have to give a disclaimer that it isn't because there were gay/trans people in the game.
The lady Ghostbusters effect
Oh, it comes out on Thursday, nice! And no Denuvo, I see... π΄ββ οΈ
Either they have an unshakeable faith in the game, or they have so little faith it isn't even worth protecting to them. And i don't see a reason to have faith.
There are more positive reviews out there. I think it will at least be worth playing, though not for $70.
Positive reviews from people that were specifically selected and people who were ~~bribed with~~ given ~~nice vacations~~ trips out to demo the game in person and ~~future access to their games~~ a nice relationship with EA.
As I said, not worth $70, but odds are I'll at least like it better than Starfield.
Not watching because spoilers. I'm definitely going to play it. I'm worried it is not going to meet expectations but I have heard from people who have early access and they say it's fine. I didn't want them to elaborate.
Keep in mind most game releases piss people off, especially in popular franchises. I mean, there are people who hated Skyrim and that's unfathomable to me.
So I take these reviews with a huge grain of salt right now. Ask me again on Saturday how it's going.
Gotta say I don't like the art direction though. Blech. And I was a Solavellan so I'm already pissed off by what I gleaned from the preview trailer.
I'm trying to remain optimistic but I feel those who are undecided should wait for reviews after the full release.
Edit: it's not going well. I'm hoping it gets better.
For what it's worth, even the bad reviews agree that it's bug-free and feature-complete at launch. It also seems to be at least competent as an action RPG, although not doing anything new with the genre. Where opinions wildly diverge is whether it's a good Bioware and more specifically Dragon Age game.
There is a very clear spoiler section in the review, easy to skip. It's not looking too good so far though sadly.
From what I heard, the writing isn't as good as previous games, notably Origins. Very light-hearted in general.